iPhone syndrome

I'm sure there is an amazing reason why they warrant suck a hatred. Care to share?
 
They're not completely useless. I came || <-- that close to getting a new job that was brought to my attention by someone who found me on LinkedIn.
 
Stereodude said:
They're not completely useless. I came || <-- that close to getting a new job that was brought to my attention by someone who found me on LinkedIn.
Click to expand...

I find LinkedIn far more useful than other social networking sites. I was recruited to my current job though LinkedIn.
 
The problem with Linkedin is that they Will. Not. Stop. Spamming. Apparently the only way to make yourself unavailable to linkedin crap is to belong to linkedin and turn it off. I've had invitations@linkedin.com blocked as a sender for ages, but I still get invited to join. I can't just block it everything that says linkedin because lots of corporate communications seem to include a link to it. I don't want their shit in my mailbox though, and I hate the fact that there's no way to actually turn it off.
 
How many emails do you get from them on a regular basis? I see maybe one a day or every other day. Those emails are interesting to me, so I guess I don't mind. I get contacts from people with interesting positions and other updates with decent stuff in them. I agree with timwhit and Stereodude, it's more useful than any other social networking site. I did a search in my gmail and I don't see a lot of messages. I haven't looked into disabling them, so that could still be an issue.
 
I don't want to belong to a social networking site. At all. Ever. It's not about "more useful", it's about my disinclination to participate in the first place.
I get two or three messages that make it through my filters every week. That's two or three messages I do not want. There does not appear to be a way to communicate that with the company. It's not just that they send UCE, it's that they don't respond to any mechanism I have found for telling them to stop. How that is different from any other spam, I am not sure. I certainly can't draw a distinction.
 
Mercutio said:
How that is different from any other spam, I am not sure. I certainly can't draw a distinction.
Click to expand...

It isn't. I also don't get upset by spam. It's not worth putting any energy into it. If you really want to spend your hatred energy, get linkedin put into the major spamlist databases so that they get their act together.
 
Given that I only see maybe a half dozen unwanted messages in a typical week, it's a rather significant portion of the total.
 
It does annoy that they don't comply with the spam laws. The bigger they get the more ripe they are for a lawsuit by doing that too.
 
I didn't read that one yet but the one I lined above said they still hadn't found evidence that they were breached.
 
App store policy at its worst.

If nothing else, we’re gratified to at least have come to an understanding that we didn’t violate the guidelines – Apple simply doesn’t want us providing this functionality in the App Store. Ultimately, if Apple doesn’t want it, we can’t provide it and users can’t have it.
Click to expand...

http://rogueamoeba.com/utm/2012/06/06/7073-users-can-be-wrong/

I have had about three of these apps now that did that and they have all been pulled, but this is the first that I have read didn't violate the letter and intent of the rules but got pulled anyway.
 
MaxBurn said:
Guess they found it.

http://www.theverge.com/2012/6/6/3068652/linkedin-member-passwords-stolen
Click to expand...

The SHA-1 values represent a completely valid compromise simply because Rainbow Tables for values of up to X arbitrary digits have already been calculated. Since SpammedIn isn't storing the original password anyway, all bad guys really need is a collision between the hash value and an entry in the Rainbow Table and they've got a compromised account. SpammedIn could at least have salted their SHA-1 calculation with some random value to make the bad guys' work harder. They did not even do that.
 
I saw some twitter back and forth mentioning that salting etc would have not really been a lot of work to implement and make things much more secure. Not a lot of love out there for them.
 
Unfortunately, there's still a lot of systems that store passwords in plaintext (and possibly some arguments for it). If your not going to store passwords in plain though, you really should do it right. The problem is that every website (or software package) developes its own way to store and check/manage user credentials. Most of these applications don't do it right- either in the authentication phase, the authorization phases later on, or the basic storage/handling of credentials. If programming languages would do a better job of building in secure methods, and esp programming examples for this stuff, it wouldn't continue to be an issue (authorization/authentication issues have frequently been cited as being in the top-10 security breach methods by Verizon Security each year).

There's a really good discussion on NANOG about better methods to login to sites. The prevailing recommendation is to use SSH or x.509(used in HTTPS) key pairs and take the storage/management completely away from the application providers altogether. It'll be up to the user to maintain 1 or 2 private keys.
 
and just to bring this further off topic... http://www.h-online.com/open/news/i...n-bypass-for-MySQL-root-revealed-1614990.html


On a more topical note, Apple released an IOS security architecture brief this month. Reading through it, it all sounds good in concept until you remember that Apple must have left some little bits out - otherwise jailbreaking wouldn't be possible. There's also a few other browser bugs that make you wonder if they gave their own apps special permission to be able to bypass a few of these security restrictions.
 
Perhaps I should also put that last statement in perspective. I still view using an iOS device as one of the most secure ways the average consumer can use a personal computer. In theory (according to Apple's brief), an iOS based device should be highly secure and (nearly) incapable of security breaches; in practice, it is the most secure consumer oriented PC device around and strikes a great balance between usability and security. http://images.apple.com/ipad/business/docs/iOS_Security_May12.pdf

Everything I've seen indicates that Android devices follow the Linux security model, meaning the bulk of their security exists due to being a smaller target. That has and will continue to change. Android has gotten better, but security does not seem to be among the top priorities for the Android team.
 
blakerwry said:
I still view using an iOS device as one of the most secure ways the average consumer can use a personal computer.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately, that comes at such a huge cost to basic functionality that the tradeoff is really not worth the hassle of dealing with the hardware. "General data storage" should be a fundamental function of a general purpose computing device and icraps fail at that.
 
Mercutio said:
Unfortunately, that comes at such a huge cost to basic functionality that the tradeoff is really not worth the hassle of dealing with the hardware. "General data storage" should be a fundamental function of a general purpose computing device and icraps fail at that.
Click to expand...

Nope. There is no huge cost to functionality. Your use-case is atypical.
 
Obviously not, given the additional complexity of supporting iOS devices for general-purpose remote file access as we recently discussed.
 
For most purposes of general consumption - e.g. you are using or looking at stuff other people made and not making your own [spreadsheets, movies, documents, etc] the iDevices do a really good job.

Now, content creation is a whole other matter. A full computer (PC/MacOS/Linux) is still required for this - no Windows metro, iPhone, etc interface is going to fill this purpose.

If your customer wants to create content on an iPad/iPhone, then they either have a niche market or they've chosen the wrong tool for the job. End of story.
 
It's not just content creation. It's "viewing content that doesn't come from or is not well supported by Apple" that's problematic.
 
Seeing this pop up on twitter a lot tonight

“What's odd is that you can now install Chome on 95%+ of iPhones, but only 4% of Android phones.”
 
This is fairly well done. :-)

Apple to Sue CERN over Higgs Boson

Apple to Sue CERN over Higgs Boson

Apple has sued CERN to block appearance of the collaboration's highly anticipated Higgs Boson in the United States.

The Cupertino tech giant is looking to receive an injunction on the grounds that the Higgs Boson infringes on at least two Apple patents.

According the complaint, which was filed in a California court earlier today and posted online by disgruntled scientists, the Higgs Boson clearly infringes on rotating displays and unified search technologies owned by Apple.

Apple’s complaint claims “it is clear that infringement can be shown with respect to these patents based on the current record. And anyway, Steve Jobs found God in the 1970s."

CERN, unsurprisingly, is having none of it. “CERN believes Apple’s request is without merit,” a CERN spokesperson told the Swiss Times in a statement. “We will vigorously oppose the request and demonstrate to the court that the Higgs Boson is unique and distinctive.”

Apple’s move to block the Higgs Boson in the United States is just the latest in a long line of patent disputes between companies that use computers in their work. Last month, Apple filed a motion against the National Weather Service over its iCloud patents.

CERN unveiled the Higgs on US Independence Day, in a move thought to be a deliberate swipe at Apple. Perhaps the most anticipated sub-atomic particle this year, it’s the final piece in CERN's popular Standard Model lineup following the Graviton S2.

The Higgs features around 190 GeV of non-configurable mass, a zero-spin display, and enough decay routes to populate a small mall. It is expected to run on Android Jelly Bean.

Apple’s Higgs Boson complaint cites press reports saying CERN has already created more than four hundred Higgs Bosons — meaning it could cause “irreparable harm” to Apple were these bosons to enter the US.

Do you think Apple has any ground to stand on here, or is this a frivolous complaint? Weigh in below.
Click to expand...
 
ddrueding said:
Nope, neither cares about the consumers. They care about their customers, which are the not the consumers.
Click to expand...

Most designers are very idealistic, and would care more about the design aesthetic than anything else. That particular article is actually a discussion of using a form with an outmoded function.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top